Saga Who handles Star Wars better? George Lucas or Disney? (Discussion)

The trick there though is that it all comes from Lucas. He was being a bit unserious there are well (as he often is when talking about himself).

Lucas doesn't talk about how genius he is and since he won't it's up to others to say so.

 

I always finds this statement kind of strange. There were loads of callbacks and nostalgia in the PT too. They're everywhere from costumes to characters to dialogue to scenes. The ST films are really nothing new in that regards. A lot of the times it seems the speaker is just unaware because they grew up with all 6 movies or watched them all together.

 

Well I feel it is a bit of both.

With the PT Lucas had an overall story but changed a lot of things as he went along.
The OT was more made up on the fly and RotJ brought it to a premature close.

Disney, some stuff feels like they have not thought trough all of it or different directors can come in and change things.
What somewhat irked me between TFA and TLJ is how strong the FO suddenly became.
And the whole FO chases the Resistance was the weakest bit in the film.

But comparing the three Disney films with the three PT films, I still find them to be better films.
Directing, acting etc.

So I would say that Lucas is better for overall vision and basic ideas but Disney, so far, has made better films.

Bye for now.
Blackboard Monitor

 

What's more interesting is people trying to lessen Lucas' involvement in the success of SW. ANH was a mess until it was "saved" in the edit by Marcia Lucas, ESB and RotJ were "saved" thanks to Kershner and Kasdan's writings but the PT was a mess because Lucas surrounded himself by "yes men" and less collaborative, apparently.

 

I always find it funny that when mentioning the editing of Star Wars, they always mention Marcia Lucas, but they never mention Paul Hirsch and Richard Chew, whom I believe did most of the editing.

 

They might think it makes a better story.

 

So far, the best movie provided by Disney from my standpoint has been Rogue One. But I gotta say, I think GL will always be the best handler for SW. That's not to say Disney didn't make good movies out of TFA and TLJ, but for me, they don't compare to the first 6.

 

If acclaim is anything to go by the Disney era sure is way ahead. Apart from the higher average ratings & reviews there’s the awards & nominations. TLJ just received 4 Oscar nominations. So now we can compare the 3 Disney/LFL movies with the last 3 Lucas films, ie the Prequels.

PT: 5 nominations.
ST/R1: 11 nominations.

Unfortunately SW hasn’t won since RotJ. Maybe TLJ will break that drought.

 

It isn't.

Acclaim from Hollywood is the last thing the new movies need. It really drags them down.

And of course the director is the ultimate editor in this case which is not always the case.

Imagine if Lucas hadn't put Obi-Wan's theme (as it was then) over the sunsets or had (as ML wanted) the Toschi station scenes.

 

The George Constanza “opposite” theory. Good one. Pity TLJ received no Razzie noms. That would really give it a boost

 

I know someone who DID and it wasn't Al Pacino!

 

If we are talking about acclaims with the Oscar nominations of this year, then let's talk about the other movies in the nominee list other than Star Wars to remain impartial, like, let's say Blade Runner 2049 in order to remain in the science-fiction part.

Sure there are 5 Oscar nominations for Blade Runner 2049 but if we look closely at those nominations, there's no nominations for "Best Director" or "Best Movie of the year" or "Best Science-Fiction movie" despite being an ambitious, risky and challenging movie, even more than TLJ, TFA, Rogue One or other movies that Disney could have released this year with the Marvel universe... So, why Blade Runner 2049 doesn't get more recognition?

Denis Villeneuve, the director behind the making of Blade Runner 2049, said he wasn't surprised the movie didn't get more recognition for the Academy Awards this year saying that's part because the movie has poorly done in the Box-Office, while on the other side TLJ, TFA and Rogue One have all done excellently well at the box-office, meaning that the box-office performance, despite what critics can say, can also influence the jury's judgment: http://montrealgazette.com/entertai...ight-on-people-in-the-shadows-villeneuve-says

Even when you look at the BAFTA Awards, the Saturn Awards and other awards, Blade Runner 2049 got nominated but won none or only a handful of the awards, while The Force Awakens won more prizes even if it didn't get an Oscar...

So how come a more ambitious and intelligent movie as Blade Runner 2049 couldn't win more awards and even couldn't perform better at the Box-Office than some pop-corn flicks like the latest Star Wars movies, while being in a completely different level of sophistication?

The point I want to get to with this is that don't always take for granted, or for cash, academy awards and box-office performances of the movies to compare which one is better than the other...

 

You're often one of the first to point out what is a "subjective" opinion. So I hope you recognise your statement here as exactly that.

Also, why should "ambition & intelligence" matter in those specific technical categories? Despite the fact that IMO TLJ has plenty of that, as does Blade Runner.

Finally, should we point out to you, & to Dennis the multitude of films that have received nominations & awards yet have done poorly at the box office? I think this is just a case of being defensive & spinning the situation to suit yourselves. Dennis in the case of his movie, & yourself bcs maybe a couple of your favourite SW movies weren't showered with the kinds of awards & nominations you would welcome.

 

so far...considering everything, I'd say Lucas.

 

While we're talking Oscars following the nomination announcement, here's how the movies have fared so far:



Rogue One received 2 nominations for no wins.
TLJ 4 nominations. Results pending.

 

This would assume that getting an Oscar nomination has any real validity outside of self validation in the industry (which is the point). The Oscars are a joke when it comes to rewarding movies. It's a political nonsense. We can name dozens of SF, action, western and movies of that ilk that get nothing but what are considered "technical art" nominations and awards.

So for example Die Hard should have at least been nominated for Best Picture of 1988. Superman 1978, Alien 1979, Blade Runner 1982, Aliens 1986 and of course TESB 1980, ROTJ 1983, TPM 1999, AOTC 2002 and ROTS 2005.

Look at that chart and see that even JW didn't get best score noms for any of the PT. Now I doubt Lucas did much promotion during that time but still...

So you place validity on awards?

Actually I'm glad you pointed that out because bizarrely it seems that for some reason HC won Razzies for supporting actor (which makes no sense as he was the central character) so they had to manufacture a way to get him in. He also won best villain for MTV so I guess that made some people happy.

 

You think TPM & AotC should’ve been nominated for Best Picture?
Now there’s a question I’d never imagined asking.

 

With these movies?

1999
American Beauty
The Cider House Rules
The Green Mile
The Insider
The Sixth Sense

2002
Chicago
Gangs of New York
The Hours
The Lord of the Rings: The Two Towers
The Pianist

Absolutely.

and for 2005 not only should ROTS have been nominated (if the AA were actually about movies) it should have won hands down.

Crash
Brokeback Mountain
Capote
Good Night, and Good Luck
Munich

 

Absolutely. Tell me you wouldn't be the first singing from the rooftops if your boy HC won anything...but let me guess - For everyone else "You shouldn't place validity on awards"

 

Hardly. I'd be happy for the individual of course but awards are nonsense as comprised because it's really not about the actual movies but the kind of movies they are. Now if over the decades the Oscars has shown to really be about the very best movies then it'd be different but they aren't.

 

Fair enough...

 

With Lucas Star Wars felt more special

 

No, not “with” those movies. They only nominated 5 back then. Which films should TPM & AotC replace out of those? Which ones are they better than?

 

For starters I would put AOTC over Chicago for sure.